Port Med. Wellness, Inc. v. Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co.

Good Law
233 Cal. Rptr. 3d 830·24 Cal. App. 5th 153
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 10, 2018B275874California11,038 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Lavin, J.

*158 INTRODUCTION

*835 Port Medical Wellness, Inc. (Port Medical) sued the International Longshore & Warehouse Union-Pacific Maritime Association Welfare Plan (Plan), its Board of Trustees (Board), and its former claims administrator, Connecticut General Life Insurance Company (Connecticut General), seeking *159 payment for health care services provided to persons eligible for benefits under the Plan. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of all defendants. 1

State law causes of action seeking to recover unpaid benefits under a welfare benefit plan regulated under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) ( 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. ) are generally conflict preempted. We conclude that Port Medical's claims for breach of implied-in-fact contract, intentional misrepresentation and quantum meruit-each of which seeks payment for services covered under the Plan-are conflict preempted under section 514 of ERISA. Port Medical's two remaining claims-unfair competition ( Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq. ) and intentional interference with prospective economic advantage-are not preempted because they are predicated on the theory that the Plan and Connecticut…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.